Discuss mailing list

[<vv AT cgs.pw>]

It's a little jarring to hear constant reference
to 501(c)3 as if we're all Americans. If this is
supposed to be an international group then it is
somewhat off-color to make such an assumption.
The US is not the center of the world.

That said, the US may well be a suitable place
for this organization, though I would think that
some European country, or even Canada, would be
better - if for no other reason than it would be
further out of the reach of ICANN.

As for annual application, I don't know how it
works in the US, but here you just need to file
an annual report once you're registered. That's
actually pretty easy. I'm on a number of boards
for small societies and it's not much of a burden.
However, being a registered non-profit does carry
some responsibilities which I'm not convinced that
OpenNIC is able to meet. There are certainly some
hoops to go through to even get there in the first
place. This will all have different aspects in
different countries, though I imagine the basic
"Societies Act", or whatever it's called there,
would contain similar ideas. We just had a major
re-write here in Canada and it's been a lot of work
for us to figure out what we all need to do to
get in line with the new act. I found some very
good on-line legal breakdowns and guidelines for 
groups such as mine who can't afford lawyers, so
it's not as onerous as some might think.

To me that's all just an intellectual exercise
though, because if OpenNIC were to incorporate
then it would be the end of the "open" part of
how we work. Whether that's good or bad or
indifferent is not the issue to me, but rather
that if it happened it would probably be a fork
of the present group. Do we have enough members
to split like that? Will the incorporated fork
be able to move ahead fast enough to not simply
fall apart and atrophy? I don't know. But those
are the issues that come to my mind.

Regards,
        Ole


On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 22:20:30 -0400 (EDT)
"Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:

> Well, first you need to incorporate before even thinking
> about (annually I think) applying for 501(c)3. In fact a
> 501(c)3 is pointless unless you're trying to attract
> large donations (as in, hundreds of thousands of
> dollars). Also, who would get the money?
> 
> --
> 
> -Dan Q
> 
> 
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:16:45 -0500, Jonah Aragon
> <jonah AT opennic.org> wrote:
> 
> > I think this is why we aren’t a 501(c)(3) yet, but I
> > was just saying that forming such an organization was
> > at one point voted on and ratified.
> > 
> > Jonah
> >   
> > > On Jul 25, 2018, at 9:15 PM, Daniel Quintiliani
> > > <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > A reminder about 501(c)3, since sometimes people
> > > mention it, OpenNIC will need a board of directors,
> > > including a treasurer, keeping of records, and all
> > > before you hire a tax attorney to apply for 501(c)3
> > > status with the IRS (and they may refuse, or revoke
> > > 501(c)3 status from OpenNIC later on). 
> > > 
> > > Also, the elected board of directors (or donors with
> > > enough money to have filed itemized deductions) will
> > > have the final say, not the "voters"
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 
> > > -Dan Q
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 20:01:50 -0500, Jonah Aragon
> > > <jonah AT opennic.org> wrote: 
> > >> Yes. In my opinion, OpenNIC’s purpose was to be a
> > >> user-controlled alternative to ICANN. The problem
> > >> with ICANN wasn’t the rules they implemented
> > >> necessarily, but the opaque decision-making process
> > >> behind them, and their clear money grabbing
> > >> practices. Not to mention their status as a monopoly
> > >> on the domain name system.
> > >> 
> > >> Developing an actual organizational structure is our
> > >> path to becoming a serious alternative to ICANN (as
> > >> a related reminder, we did already vote to form a
> > >> 501(c)(3) organization, although that hasn’t
> > >> materialized as of yet). I know a lot of people here
> > >> seem to be content with the status quo, but it’s
> > >> time to get back to our original purpose of building
> > >> a serious competitor.
> > >> 
> > >> Our current setup can be achieved by anybody with a
> > >> computer and 5 minutes to install BIND9. If OpenNIC
> > >> is an organization in name only, if we aren’t
> > >> willing to enact policies that will help us form a
> > >> united cause against ICANN, why does OpenNIC need to
> > >> exist at all? 
> > >> 
> > >> Jonah
> > >>   
> > >>> On Jul 25, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Daniel Quintiliani
> > >>> <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:
> > >>> 
> > >>> I've only been involved in OpenNIC since
> > >>> Prism-Break (2013 according to the mailing list
> > >>> archives), but to my knowledge OpenNIC was created
> > >>> to allow democratic, non-secret decision making as
> > >>> opposed to ICANN, right?
> > >>> 
> > >>> --
> > >>> 
> > >>> -Dan Q
> > >>> 
> > >>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:36:57 -0500, kevin
> > >>> <krattai AT gmail.com> wrote: 
> > >>>> I've just been thinking about a problem with
> > >>>> another community I'm involved in and while
> > >>>> working through possible solutions, I remembered
> > >>>> that corporate strategies yields corporate results.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> As an original group of volunteerists, it's odd to
> > >>>> look at the way openNIC has progressed in some
> > >>>> areas, especially for a group that I believe
> > >>>> wanted to get away from the bureaucracy that
> > >>>> resulted in ICANN.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> I'm not opposed to voting for things as a way to
> > >>>> maintain focus on certain activities that will
> > >>>> move a community forward, but when a vote is about
> > >>>> developing a bureaucratic and corporate structure,
> > >>>> it really doesn't make sense for a group of
> > >>>> decentralized volunteerists.  In fact, it can be
> > >>>> highly detrimental to such a group activity.  A
> > >>>> lot of some of the more current "decisions" the
> > >>>> group has voted on and the direction of much of
> > >>>> our documentation, especially as "rules" rather
> > >>>> than "guidelines", I wonder what the end result of
> > >>>> openNIC might be, in relation to ICANN.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Anyhow, I just wanted to put that out there and
> > >>>> find if maybe there's others active in the group
> > >>>> who are thinking like I am, or if I'm really just
> > >>>> an outlier in the community.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Kevin  
> > >>> 
> > >>> 
> > >>> --------
> > >>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> > >>> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> --------
> > >> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> > >> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --------
> > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > 
> > 
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> 
>